Search results

Well actually, you can... and should :/ of course if it was child molesting followers, i'd be less inclined to judge the religion based on that (unless there was a particularily high number), but the thing about priests being child molestors is actually partially caused by the system the church...

Yea, well it's like I said here; http://community.boredofstudies.org/2287540/post-1282.html Yea, I'm not disagreeing with you really. But just because someone reads something and interprets it in a good/bad way, doesn't make either right. The analysis of the actual islamic texts, is a...

oi, what's wrong with pot heads >:/

Well the thing is... what is contemporary islam, is made up by the 'sohas' and the 'zahids'. Now even if the Soha's have an issue with the Zahids, that doesn't matter too much, because for sociological purposes they are all contributing to the category of things which we call 'Islam'. Now there...

Of course, in a sense we should judge the religions based on their philosophy etc... and I'm more than willing to do that also. However, religions are more than just the philosophy of their teachings. It's like for instance studying socialism (the philosophy) and also studying the soviet union...

Even if islam is ultimately peaceful in its teachings, what does that matter? I don't really care about that. The people I want to deal with are the people you would say are not correctly following their religion but still call themselves muslims, what should I call this group of people? give me...

What you have to understand MartinSpenser... is that in Australia, being on welfare and just scraping by is poverty. Now as for the people in Africa, how exactly do you think we should fix the problem? I mean, you're looking at a large chunk of the population of these countries having aids, what...

What do you mean? preemptive strike (while many disagree / feel threatened by Australia on this one, alot of them have similar policies in place), refugees (their policies are similar), howard's well-covered immigration views (they have similar ones) and drug markets (I spose you mean to say...

See they have issues with it, because often at the heart of it I think they sympathise with many of the 'extremists' - they understand why they are bombing people - they know why they're angry... they just choose not to participate in such behaviour themselves. It's like your common racist who...

Nah i'm "TheChadd" They are very smart, some of the guys there are leaders in their respective fields... like there's one guy there who is basically the king when it comes to audio engineering, I read a very long post where he slammed all the 'audiophiles' that believe vinyl records produce...

There are a few people I'd watch out for on there, i.e. Ian, but on the whole on there you'll get some REALLY good answers. To the extent of the topic they're talking about there, I don't see why it matters essentially if our 'reality' is just an illusion, even if it is, for us it is our reality...

Nah I have a pretty good sense of humour, alot of famous entertainers are atheists/skeptics, including the late, great Johnny Carson.

Why does he have to 'use' science, see that implies some sort of purpose... perhaps he just created the universe, with these laws, by accident. Of course, I think it's impossible for a God to do something by accident also, by the popular definition... Essentially I think a God is impossible...

If you say stuff like, god uses science, it does still change your outlook on life/science quite significantly. Unless you're imagining some sort of 'unconscious' as we know it, god.

Well I agree with you scary bunny, because I don't think anything is enough evidence to deny the existance of god (but on that pedantic level I also don't think anything is enough evidence to deny the existance of the loch ness), but we work off what we have.

Well as it is Coal powerplants do need to be replaced every few years, because they run out of coal (close to them) to run them. I'm sure you already know this tho, just bringing it up incase someone doesn't :o

Not really, there's alot wrong with what religions say... and of course I'll argue against anyone that just appeals to a supernatural power to get away with it. It's like : 1. 'hmmm... how is cancer started?' 2. 'LOLZ A MAGICAL BATMAN DOES IT!!!!' 1. 'Wtf?'

Science only observes with observable/testable things... god is supernatural, we have no idea what sort of contraints there are on him (if he exists) and we have no possible way to observe something that is supernatural. Much like we have to answer to any other supernatural hypothesis...

Oh I thought it might have been the song 'generator' by bad religion :(

The question was, And the answer was Now the thing is, I'm saying that if somehow a god (as popularily concieved) does exist, it must not be bound by these principles. Of course for arguments sake, such a thing is useless... like if you want to go ahead and say that God can do anything...